'USDA:
Organic Foods May Be More Contamination-Prone' ran the headlines in
October 2002. But Elsa Murano, the Under Secretary for Food Safety at the
the U. S. Department of Agriculture, who used a World Food Prize symposium
attended by hundreds of researchers and government officials from around
the world to capture such headlines, has a track record of making statements
that suit the interests of giant agri-biz - so much so that a whole series
of citizens' organisations came together to oppose her appointment to the
USDA.

We are writing concerning the nomination of Elsa Murano to the position
of Under Secretary for Food Safety for the United States Department of
Agriculture.

As you know, the role of the Under Secretary for Food Safety is a very
important one. The Under Secretary is responsible for enforcing many key
laws and administering many key programs intended to maintain the safety
and wholesomeness of our food supply. Among these are Federal Meat Inspection
Act, the Poultry Products Inspection Act, the Egg Products Inspection Act,
the Talmadge-Aiken Act, the Humane Slaughter Act and the Food Safety Research
Program.

A microbiologist by training, Murano is the director of the Center for
Food Safety at Texas A&M University. On its face, Murano would seem
a good fit for the position. However, we have become concerned with the
nature of her work at Texas A&M, her ties to industry, and the distorted
image of food irradiation that she has presented to the public.

Murano has used her position at Texas A&M to advocate for food irradiation
in a manner that we believe has been less than fully responsible. During
her presentations at conferences and other events, and in her public statements,
she has not presented a complete or balanced view of irradiation. We are
concerned that this may be due to the financial ties between her university
and the food irradiation industry.

In a Texas A&M press release last June, for example, Murano erroneously
compared food irradiation with microwaving. Nothing could be further from
the truth. An individual with her level of training and experience should
be fully aware that microwaves are non-ionizing, while irradiation uses
ionizing radiation, which has far more disrupting effects on food.

One month after Murano made these comments, Texas A&amp;M signed
a 10-year research and development deal with the Titan Corporation, a leading
food irradiation company that, it should be noted, frequently makes the
same erroneous comparison to microwaving. Titan provided the school with
millions of dollars worth of irradiation equipment which Texas A&M
employees operate at discounted wages or for free and Titan enjoys the
economic benefits. The company has stated that this arrangement is worth
more than $10 million.

This past April, during a presentation that was subsequently posted
on the USDA s website, Murano stated that more than 1,000 research studies
have revealed "no significant difference between irradiated and non-irradiated
foods in terms of: toxigenicity, pathogencity, or mutagenicity." Again,
nothing could be further from the truth. Many studies some of which were
funded by the U.S. government have revealed serious health problems in
lab animals that ate irradiated food, including premature death, stillbirths,
a rare form of cancer, genetic damage, fatal internal bleeding, organ malfunctions
and vitamin deficiencies.

And, at a recent meeting of the USDA National Advisory Committee on
Meat and Poultry Inspection, Murano suggested that the labels on irradiated
eggs could tell consumers that they do not have to cook them as long as
non-irradiated eggs. This suggestion deserves serious scrutiny, given the
well-documented chemical and nutritional changes that occur in irradiated
food. At the same meeting, Murano attempted to gauge the opinion of other
panel members about allowing irradiated food in the school lunch program.
Given the public outcry over a recent proposal to serve irradiated food
to school children, it would appear that Murano's viewpoint on this issue
is out of step with the prevailing opinion of Americans.

Murano is also a well-known proponent of the Hazard Analysis Critical
Control Point (HACCP) program for meat inspection, serving as a HACCP
trainer throughout the world. HACCP was originally promoted as a way
to enhance traditional inspection by bringing more pathogen testing into
the system. In reality, HACCP shifts the responsibility for ensuring
a safe meat supply from government inspectors to the meat industry, and
is being used by USDA as a step towards complete industry self-inspection.
HACCP s testing program is seriously flawed and the program has curtailed
inspectors authority to the point that government meat inspection has been
replaced with an industry honor system. Last year the USDA's own Inspector
General concluded that under HACCP, the agency has "reduced oversight beyond
what was prudent and necessary for the protection of the consumer."

Murano s narrow point of view that irradiation is a panacea to food
safety problems and her promotion of HACCP cause us to question her ability
to make sound decisions on food policy. Irradiation and HACCP are not silver-bullets.
The answer to many food safety challenges lies in slowing line-speeds in
our slaughter and processing facilities, and hiring more government inspectors
and training them adequately.

We realize, Senator Harkin, that you are a supporter of food irradiation.
While we may disagree with your view, I trust that you would agree with
our position that the person who becomes Under Secretary for Food Safety
should be someone who has the experience and the credibility to fill that
job.

At a time when food safety problems cry out for creative, thoughtful
solutions, it is extremely important that the American people have every
confidence in the person who holds this position. Unfortunately, Murano's
track record leaves us greatly concerned that her appointment would not
engender this confidence.